To:J. S. HANECKI[4]

Published:First published in 1921 inProletarskaya RevolutsiaNo. 2.

      Sent from Zurich to Stockholm.

      Printed from the original.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Progress Publishers,[1976],

      Moscow,Volume 35,

      pages308-313.Translated:Andrew RothsteinTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive.You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work, as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

March 30, 1917

DearComrade,

Ithank you with all my heart for the trouble you are taking and for
your help. I cannot, of course, make use of the services of people who are
connected with the publisher ofDie
Glocke.[5]I cabled you today that the only hope of breaking out
of here is by an exchange of emigrants in Switzerland for German
internees. Britain will on no account let me through, or any
internationalists at all, neither Martov and his friends nor Natanson and
his friends. The British sent Chernov back to France, although he had all
his papers for transit!! It is clear that the Russian proletarian
revolution has no more malignant enemy than the British imperialists. It is
clear that Milyukov (and Co.), agents of Anglo-French imperialist capital,
and Russian imperialists themselves, are capable of everything—deception,
treachery, and everything else—in order to prevent the internationalists
returning to Russia. The least confidence in this respect either in
Milyukov or in Kerensky (an empty chatterer, an agent of the Russian
imperialist bourgeoisie in his objective role) would be simply ruinous for
the working-class movement and for our Party, and would border on betrayal
of internationalism. The only—without exaggeration, the only—hope for
us to get to Russia is to send as soon as possible a reliable person to
Russia, tosecurefrom the government, by pressure from the
“Soviet of Workers’ Deputies”, anexchangeof all the emigrants
in Switzerland for interned Germans. It is necessary to act with the
maximumenergy, making a record of every step, not sparing expense on telegrams,
and collecting documents against Milyukov and Co., who are capable of
dragging matters out, feeding us with promises, swindling, etc. You can
imagine what torture it is for all of us to be sitting here at such a time.

Furthermore,the dispatch of a reliable person to Russia isstill
more necessaryfor reasons of principle. The latest information in the
foreign press gives clearer and clearer indications that the government,
with the direct help of Kerensky and thanks to the (putting it mildly)
unforgivable wobblings of Chkheidze, is swindling—and swindlingnot
without success—the working class, representing the imperialist war
as a “defensive” one. Judging from the telegram of the St. Petersburg
Telegraph Agency of March 30, 1917, Chkheidze has allowed himself to be
completely deceived by this slogan, adopted also by the Soviet of Workers’
Deputies—if this source, generally unreliable of course, is to be
believed. At all events, even if the report is untrue, thedangerof such a deception is all the same undoubtedlyvast. All the
efforts of our Party must be concentrated on fighting it. Our Party would
disgrace itself for ever, commit political suicide, if it tolerated such a
deception. To judge from one report, Muranov returned from Kronstadttogether with Skobelev. If Muranov went thereon behalfof the Provisional Government of the Guchkovs and Milyukovs, I very much
ask you to pass on (through someone reliable),and to print, that
Iabsolutely condemn this, that any rapprochement with those who
are wobbling in the direction of social-patriotism and have taken up the
profoundly mistaken, profoundly harmful social-pacifist, Kautskian,
position of Chkheidze and Co. is, I am deeply convinced,harmfulfor the working class,dangerous,inadmissible.

Ihope you have received my “Letters from Afar”
			      Nos. 1–4,[1]in which I developed the theoretical and political foundation for these
views. If these letters have been lost, or did not reach Petrograd, please
cable me, and I will send you copies.

Thereis no doubt that in the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’
and Soldiers’ Deputies there are numerous, even, it seems,
a majority of
(1) supporters of Kerensky, a most dangerous
agent of the imperialist bourgeoisie, pursuing
imperialism, i.e., the defence and justification of a plundering war
of conqueston Russia’s part, under cover of an ocean of
sounding phrases and empty promises,
(2) supporters of
Chkheidze, who is wobbling hopelessly in the direction of
social-patriotism and sharing all (he philistinism and
stupidity of Kautskianism. Our Party is obliged to carry on the
most stubborn, the most highly principled, the most
pressing and most merciless struggle againstbothcurrents. And
I personally will not hesitate for a second to declare, and to
declare in print, that I shall prefer even an immediate split
with anyone in our Party, whoever it may be, to making
concessions to the social-patriotism of Kerensky and Co. or the
social-pacifism and Kautskianism of Chkheidze and Co.

Imust at all costs demand the republication in Petrograd
—if only under the title:From the History of the Last Years
of Tsarism—of theSotsial-Demokratpublished here, of the
pamphlet by Lenin and Zinoviev on the war and
socialism,[6]ofKommunistandSbornik Sotsial-Demokrata. But most of
all, and first of all, the theses in No. 47 ofSotsial-Demokrat(of October 13,
1915).[2]These theses are now exceptionally
important.

Thesetheses say directly, clearly, precisely how we should
act in a revolution in Russia, and they do it 1 1/2 years before
the revolution.

Thesetheses have boon remarkably, literally confirmed
by the revolution.

Thewar hasnotceased,and cannot cease, to be
imperialist on the part of Russia, so long as
(1) the landowners and
capitalists, representatives of the bourgeoisclass, are in
power;
(2) so long as such direct agents and servants of that
bourgeoisie as Kerensky and the other social-patriots are
in power;
(3) so long as the treaties between tsarism and the
Anglo-French imperialists remain in force (the Guchkov–
Milyukov government hasopenlydeclaredabroad—I don’tknow whether it has done so in Russia—that it isloyalto
these treaties). They are robber treaties, for the seizure of
Galicia, Armenia, Constantinople, etc., etc.;
(4) so long as
these treaties havenotbeen published andnotannulled;
(5)
so long as the whole alliance between Russia and the
Anglo-French bourgeois, imperialist governments hasnotbeen
broken off altogether;
(6) so long as state power in Russia hasnotpassedfromthe imperialist bourgeoisie (mere promises
and “pacifist” declarations, however much the stupid
Kautsky, Chkheidze and Co. believe in them, donottransform the
bourgeoisie into anon-bourgeoisie)into the handsof the
proletariat, whichaloneis capable, on condition that it is
supported by the poorer section of the peasantry, of breakingnot merely in wordsbut in deeds with the interests of capital,
with imperialist policy, with the plundering of other
countries, of emancipating the peoples oppressed by the Great
Russianscompletely, withdrawing the troops from Armenia
and Galiciaat once, etc.;
(7) only the proletariat is capable,
if it rids itself of the influence of its national bourgeoisie,
of winning thegenuineconfidence of the proletarians ofallthe belligerent countries, and entering into peace
negotiationswith them;
(8) these proletarian peace terms are set
forth precisely and clearly both in No 47 ofSotsial–
Demokratand in my letterNo. 4.

Henceit is clear that the watchword: “We arenowdefending the Republic in Russia, we arenowcarrying on a ‘
defensive war’, we shall fightWilhelm, we are lightingforthe
overthrow of Wilhelm”
is the greatest deception, the greatest
swindling of the workers!! For Guchkov-Lvov-Milyukov
and Co. are landowners and capitalists, representatives
of theclassof landowners and capitalists,imperialistswho
are fighting for thesamerobber ends, on the basis of the same
robber treaties concluded by tsarism, in alliance with thesameimperialist robber bourgeoisie of Britain, France and
Italy.

Theappeal to the Germans by the bourgeois andimperialistrepublic in Russia—“Overthrow Wilhelm”—is a
repetition of the lying slogan of the French social–
chauvinists, traitors to socialism, Jules Guesde, Sembat and Co.

Ina very popular way, very clearly, without learned words,
it must be explained to the workers and soldiers that it isnot only Wilhelm who has to be overthrown, but also the
kings of Great Britain and Italy. That is first of all. And
secondly, andmost important, thebourgeoisgovernments must
be overthrown,beginning with Russia—for otherwise peace
cannot be won. It may be thatwe cannotimmediately
“overthrow” the government of Guchkov-Milyukov. That
may be so. But that is not an argument fortelling an
untruth!! The workers must be told thetruth. We have to say
that the government of Guchkov-Milyukov and Co. is an
imperialist government, that the workers and peasants
mustfirst of all(now or after elections to the Constituent
Assembly, if it is not used to deceive the people, if the
elections are not postponed until after the war—the question of
choice of moment cannot be decided from here), first of all
must transferallstate power into the hands of the working
class, the enemy of capital, the enemy of imperialist war,
and only then will they have therightto appeal for the
overthrow ofallkings andallbourgeois governments.

ForGod’s sake try and deliver all this to Petrograd and
toPravda, to Muranov and Kamenev and the others. For
God’s sake make every effort to send this with a most
reliable person. It would be best of all if a reliable sensible chap
like Kuba went (he would perform a great service to the whole
world working-class movement) and helped our friends in
Petrograd!! I hope you will do this!! Do everything in your
power.

Conditionsin Petrograd are exceptionally difficult. The
republican patriots are strainingeveryeffort. They are
trying to drown our Party in slander and dirt (the
Chernomazov “affair”: I am sending a document about
it[3]),

etc., etc.

Therecannotbe any confidence in Chkheidze and Co., or
Sukhanov or Steklov and the like. No rapprochement with
other parties, any of them! Not a shadow of confidence in or
support for the government of Guchkov-Milyukov and Co.!!
The most irreconcilable propaganda of internationalism and
of struggle with republican chauvinism and social–
chauvinism everywhere, both in the press and within the Soviet of
Workers’ Deputies: the organisation ofourParty: this isthe essential. Kamenev must realise that he bears aworld–historic responsibility.[7]

Don’tgrudge money on communications between
Stockholm and Petrograd!!

Ibeg you very much, dear comrade, to cable me on
receipt of this letter, and generally to keep meau courantin
every respect. I hope the Swedish friends will also help in
this.

Allthe best.

Yours,Lenin

[1]Seepresent edition, Vol. 23, pp. 295–342.—Ed.

[2]Referenceis to Lenin’s article “Several Theses” (see present
edition, Vol. 21, pp. 401–04).—Ed.

[3]Referenceis to Lenin’s article “Tricks of the Republican
Chauvinists” (see present edition, Vol. 23, pp. 362–64).—Ed.

[4]Hanecki,J. S.(1879–1937)—prominent figure in the Polish
and Russian revolutionary movements; in 1917, a member of the Bureau Abroad
of the C.C. of the R.S.D.L.P.(B.). After the bourgeois democratic
revolution of February 1917 he took up residence in Stockholm.

[5]DieGlocke(The Bell)—fortnightly magazine published in
Munich and from 1915 to 1925 in Berlin, by Parvus (Helfand), a member of
the German Social-Democratic Party, social-chauvinist, and agent of the
German imperialists.

[6]ThepamphletSocialism and War(The Attitude of the
R.S.D.L.P. Towards the War) was published on the eve of the Zimmerwald
Conference and distributed to the delegates.

In1918 it was republished by the Petrograd Soviet of Workers’ and Red
Army Deputies (see present edition, Vol. 21, pp. 295–338).

[7]Leninstresses the responsibility borne by Kamenev because Kamenev, who
had returned to Petrograd from exile on March 12 1917, had become one of
the editors ofPravdaand a representative of the Bolshevik Party
in the Petrograd Soviet.

Kamenev,however, adopted a semi-Menshevik position on certain vital
aspects of Party policy. In articles published inPravdahe argued
that the Bolsheviks should give the Provisional Government conditional
support, while exerting pressure to make it open peace negotiations at
once. In his assessment of the war Kamenev leaned towards
defencism. Kamenev’s position was sharply criticised by Lenin in his
pamphletLetters on Tactics(see present edition, Vol. 24,
pp. 42–54).